2. The Logos

It is not in the scope of my expertise to convey the significance of one of the greatest cultural transformations in human history, but one can only wonder at the steady and awesome spread of natural philosophy and rationality amidst traditional cultures imbued with gods and myths. Starting around the eastern Mediterranean around the sixth century bce, in the furthest outposts of a budding Greek civilisation (butting up against still more ancient cultures), there saw the rise of a completely new spirit of thought emerging around the sages Thales, Anaximander and Heraclitus, which continued to spread west to southern Italy through the teachings of men such as Pythagoras, Parmenides, Zeno and others. This moment is now known as the Presocratic school and was characterised by the search for naturalistic explanations and predictability rather than being at the mercy of a household filled with erratic gods chronicled in the ages of mythopoetic memorial epic. The success of philosophy was due in part to the inventions of writing, linguistics and new technical terminology that could exercise itself and compete in the public forum. The cultural change was not total, but saw a coexistence of Mythos and Logos, theogony and cosmology, in fact even as carried forth through the Middle Ages (and to present) in the rise of Christianity. Divinity migrated down to earth at that time, as did the gaze of wisdom shift from heaven to earth.

The tide of philosophy was perhaps the mother of all paradigm shifts that completely upended the theistic-based universe as conceived for thousands of years before in mythopoetic narrative. The Presocratics set the stage for the next two millennia of rational speculation. It seems there was a moment of early open inquiry and innovation into an unconflicted and contiguous coexistence of mind and nature, men newly freed from the constant overgaze of the gods and tradition. The divine became imminent then in the world, and philosophers were the new navigators and heroes. Was this Sophia’s finest hour? Moving forward, the Logos was both more and less sacredised as its abstract pure realm emerged as a new rarified Olympus in the permanence of Platonic ideational forms. The music of the spheres was not only an aspect of this knowledge, it was the model. It was rational, empirical and based on fundamental ratios reflecting the voice of nature, the very meaning of the Logos.

‘Anaximander called it “unbounded nature.” Heraclitus called it Logos’ (Johnstone Reference Johnstone2009: 55). The Logos was the master plan, the ordering or unfolding principle of the cosmos. The Logos was harmonic, proportional, balanced and ultimately unified. To grasp the nature of the Logos was to be wise. In its ordinary usage, however, it held the sense of calculation, measure, account, word, or representation. For the account to be correlated to the cosmos, there had to be a connection between the nature of things and the nature of language. Does the world speak? Heraclitus could listen to the Logos, and became wise. He said that all things flow, and you cannot step into the same river twice. He was also known for the art of ambiguity, recognising that in words (logos) can be derived multiple levels, inflections and meanings – like the river. From Heraclitus we get a correspondence between things/reality and language/logos, but not in the sense of words representing/mirroring reality, rather that there is no need for the dichotomy – ‘speech (logos) is a manifestation of reality (the Logos)’ (ibid.: 59). The term Logos is a symbol for that which wisdom apprehends. Wisdom was originally considered the highest and most perfect form of knowledge, but in the age of Homer and Hesiod, only the gods possessed such knowledge; Man was wise only in proportion to his prescience into divine matters (through the muses or trance). The philosophic movement was a democratisation of wisdom where individuals could directly cultivate knowledge through experience in life and art, divorced of ritual and the old priesthood.

The language of the Pythagoreans was number; there was a movement towards ever greater abstraction in cosmological speculation. But ‘number is real… and all things are numbers’ (ibid.: 62). All nature was quantitative and yet one-ness and two-ness were real qualities. The aspect of Logos that is proportional, harmonic and rational was essential (ousia) in Pythagorean speculation. The tetractys, the first four natural numbers, in their combinations and ratios revealed the music of the spheres, the mechanics of all nature. Temples were built in proportion to these harmonic relationships, making the hidden virtual world manifest. The proto-scientific exploration of vibration provided empirical evidence of an ideal nature and medicine for sonic healing. However, there was a ‘split between those who took Pythagorean knowledge literally and ritualistically (the akousmatikoi, who were dealing with the mere fact), and those who interpreted it from a rational viewpoint (the mathematikoi, who were concerned with the reason for the fact)’ (Renger and Stavru Reference Renger and Stavru2016: 3). In the Pythagorean community, philosophy was a way of life, where

In the Parmenidian phase of the Presocratic age, the one-ness of the logos, the sound-ness of number – where there was no dichotomy between thing and thought, reality/being (einai) – starts to lean more favourably towards the inevitable period of permanent Platonic forms that populate the intelligible realm. The method for this kind of philosophical inquiry is focused on the self-referential processes of language and number alone – the logic of logos. The observation of sense was ephemeral/transitory. In the period of fifth and fourth century bce, ‘the practice of following the logical implications of the terms used to characterise a thing emerged as a principle feature of Greek philosophy’ (Johnstone Reference Johnstone2009: 69). If it can logically exist, it can be explored in the virtual realm of idea and language.

There was dissent in Parmenides’s time. Empedocles saw in this ‘radical epistemological’ change a narrowing of possibilities: ‘Observe with all your powers, how each thing is clear, neither holding sight in greater trust compared with hearing … nor withhold trust from any of the other limbs, by whatever way there is a channel to understanding, but grasp each thing in the way in which it is clear’ (ibid.: 69). The goal of this article is to fit the sonic into this song; do our sonic constructions strive to apprehend Logos or does Logos have a twin sister in Phonos?

3. Hyper-Logos

In a similar dynamic of intellectual upheaval, a second though accelerated wave of flourishing in the realm of ideas and methods took root (reading, writing, harmony, human dignity, politics), new disciplinary branches sprouted, and with the sun of the new enlightenment bearing down, the old world ceded into the background. This time, however, free of (again) theological constraints and in the service of new regimes of societal organisation (political/economic), the exponentially inflationary dynamic of Logos crossed a qualitative threshold – from an organic tempered/rhythmic Logos to a pitched/machinic one – behaving then like an infinite generative system and acting upon the world like an invasive species. Organised Sound readers might analogise this as similar to the Stockhausian (Reference Stockhausen1959) discernment of the equivalence of duration and pitch. What is lost in the higher order equivalence? The more creative/process ontological approaches such as found in the works of Bergson and Whitehead who thought more in terms of a dynamic being were subsumed, creating a fork in the road at the turn of the twentieth century between positivistic science and philosophy. The loss was metaphysics.

In the wave of philosophy-cum-science, at the turn of twentieth century, analytical philosophy led by Bertrand Russell, seeing the functionalist writing on the wall, rendered any kind of speculative metaphysic suspect, favouring a turn to a rigorous analysis of language and symbolic logic – not wanting to be seen as soft by their now big brother, the physical sciences. ‘Symbolic logic and language analysis broke ancient barriers. In doing so they became absorbingly exciting for their own sake, and the resulting philosophic discourse inaccessible to every man’ (Holmes Reference Holmes1962: 295). Musicians of the twentieth century felt the same sense of liberation (of sounds) in breaching the ancient Pythagorean tradition of harmony and ratio, while a century of the continuous influx of new techniques (recording and synthesis), theories (cybernetics and complexity) and technologies (telephony and computers) also became ‘absorbingly exciting for their own sake’.

The tension between philosophy and science in the last century was aptly described in Canales’s (Reference Canales2005) account of the Bergson–Einstein debates regarding not only an account of time and simultaneity, but also the ultimate status or authority of modern science and philosophy – rationality and intuition. Bergson the philosopher-scientist embraced with openness both science and metaphysics, while the same could not be said of the so-called scientist-philosopher: ‘Einstein disagreed. He fought against giving philosophy (and by inference Bergson) any role in matters of time. His objections were based on his views about the role of philosophy in society’ (Canales Reference Canales2005: 1170). For the followers of Bergson: ‘This small group resigned themselves to being categorised by Einstein’s defenders as retrograde, irrational, and ignorant’ (ibid.: 1169). Among Bergson’s critiques of such rationalist fundamentalism:

Varése embraced a Bergsonian commitment to the view of complementarity between that of physics and philosophy:

Most striking in the above, as pointed out in Anderson, is that the idea of ‘the corporealisation of the intelligence that is in sounds’ is not the same idea as that of the ‘corporealisation of intelligence in sounds’. Not the embodiment of human intelligence in sounds, but Varése’s meaning was that sound possessed ‘an inherent intelligence, and perhaps a will, independent of human transformation or perception’ – as in ‘bodies of intelligent sounds moving freely in space’ (Anderson Reference Anderson1991: 33). As Wenchung Chou – Varése’s student, copyist and friend – relates, ‘Sound as living matter’ and ‘musical space as open rather than bounded’ are the central ideas of Varése’s philosophy’ (Chou Reference Chou1966: 1). Varése sees in sound an ontological relative of Bergson’s élan vital.

4. THE ALT-REALISM OF DURATION

Bergson makes a radical distinction between the world of the inert and living: matter and extension being of the domain of the inanimate; experience/aesthesis being of the domain of the animate and living energies (élan vital) – leaving aside the issue of dualism or entanglement for a future discussion. Let us also mark here the distinct fluxes of Bergson’s energetic vital flux and C. Cox’s (Reference Cox2018) sonic flux, the latter trend (of sonic materialism) seemingly satisfied in containing the flux within the materialistic. The laws of matter and space are symmetrical, reversible; the laws of time are not. Time, as a scientific conception, is not the same thing as ‘real duration’ for Bergson:

Bergson’s time is not a measurable or quantifiable time, but a qualitative time; it is not the universal/global time we put on a timeline, but a local/experiential continuous one. So while sound waves are undeniably of the material kind, they can also be conceived signaletically, as emanating outward from a narrow point in the flux continua, insinuating a more subtle realm of resonance while straining towards the threshold of apperception. In other words, beyond the sonic flux that sound waves inhabit in time lies the vital/experiential flux of wave nature in resonance with intuitive sense. The phonosopher gathers energy each day towards the dwelling in this moment of pure sonorous speculation; and so it will always remain – a continuous matter for phonosophical speculation.

In Creative Evolution, Bergson (Reference Bergson1920) seeks to define a methodology for his philosophy, a project that he assigns to the collective past and progressive future effort of many thinkers. Such a method, however, has to be true to the aim of a creative evolving philosophy, hence terms such as ‘identity’, ‘systematic’ and ‘methodic’ themselves have to be thought of in a processual not in a structural manner. This effort might be characterised not as rigorous per se, but rather as virtuous. ^{Footnote 3} We need to go back to Aristotle’s De Anima for the source of the discussion of how the ‘when is not accidental’, how an undivided time (duration) is a key element in the present/now of aesthesis (Heller-Roazen Reference Heller-Roazen2007: 51). The Aristotelian sense of sense (common sense) emerges again in the twentieth century in Bergson’s intuition and in Nancy’s Listening.

The intuitive faculty is a non-rational/irrational (irrational in a positive sense), imageless and liminal experience. Bergson develops his intuitive method, which acts in accord with the intellect, or rational faculty – not alone. ‘Intuition will only be transmitted by reason/intellect. In order to spread, to be transmitted, intuition and ideas will have to overlap’ (Bergson in Jancsary Reference Jancsary2019: 76). Whitehead, who was known for his work in both science and philosophy, comes to the same insight when he notes that: ‘One aspect of the adventure of ideas is this story of the interplay of speculation and scholarship … New directions of thought arise from flashes of intuition bringing new material within the scope of scholarly learning’ (Whitehead Reference Whitehead1939: 138). For the musician or phonosopher with a developed sense for the sonic and resonant especially, intuition works in accordance with a sensual/processual awareness as particularly apropos of his medium. Intuition allows a glimpse into the ‘irrational potential of human beings, their creativity and their spontaneity’ (Jancsary Reference Jancsary2019.: 68). Intuition is peripheral perception, an integrative sense of the whole sensorium – including intellectual discernment.

5. The Sonic Turn

The sonic turn is an alerting to the fundamental visual, textual (Kim-Cohen Reference Kim-Cohen2009) and conceptual biases that are deeply embedded in Western thought. Sarah Hickmott states the problem of theorising in the realm of the sonic: ‘despite the “unspeakable wealth” that music has afforded philosophical thought, the very attempt to theorise the audible is centred around a conflict; the inherent visual bias of theory (theoria, from thea, “a view”, and horao, “I look, see”) leaves the (im)possibility of theorising music, or sound, in perpetual debate’ (Hickmott Reference Hickmott2015: 481). Adrienne Janus provides an account of the anti-ocular turn in her article on Nancy, ‘the question does not involve listening to the “call of Being,” [ontological] but listening to the resonance of sense’ (Janus Reference Janus2011: 183). She extends the discussion further to thinkers such as Jacques Attali, Didier Anzieu and Peter Sloterdijk, ‘who attempt to engage with another mode of thinking or being through attendance to the “sense” of listening’ (ibid.: 184). Kane also covers several twists and turns in contemporary sound studies, discussing linguistic, vibrational and material turns as summarily, ontological turns that he critiques as still being essentially representational or ‘ontographical’ in character – more focused on the map rather than the territory – in that their primary project is to show the ‘ontological commitments and beliefs of particular subjects or communities’ (Kane Reference Kane2015: 2). Granted, the myriad of turns and terms of the last century creates a vortex of differencing that make it quite difficult to navigate anywhere in particular, creating a dizzying spectacle.

The sonic turn opens the door to phonosophy. As we drive down that road we notice that the signage (terminology) shifts from an emphasis on the epistemological to the acoustemological accounts found in such philosophers as Jean-Luc Nancy: ‘The sonorous… outweighs form’ (Nancy Reference Nancy2007: 2). The root of phono lies in a constellation related to voice (articulated sound), while that of oto relates to reflexive listening. The eye, unlike the ear, has no voice. Thence, the acouste-mological propagates through the linguistic matrix (phonarchy, otocracy, otonomic, etc.). The Aristotelian concept of psophos (inarticulate sound, noise) is interesting in that psophos is wisdom prefaced by a ‘p’ (signifying the unmanifest). Such terminology is explored in a discussion of Johann Gottfried Herder’s (1744–1803) contributions to language development by authors such as Jurgen Trabant (Reference Trabant2004). Nancy excavates the verb, to listen (écouter): ‘hearing, the ear, auris [Latin], a word that gives the first part of the verb auscultare … to listen attentively’ (Nancy Reference Nancy2007: 5). The Proto-Indo European (PIE) root for aus is ancestor to aurora, east, dawn – the Hebrew word for light (aur/) not being far off. The PIE au forms the roots for ‘audible’ and the Greek word to feel, aisthanesthai/aesthetics (American Heritage Dictionary nd). The ancient linguistic roots of light and sound reveal a keen intuitive sense of a resonant/vibratory world. To Know (PIE: Gno), as evidenced in the most primitive tongue, is tied to sense and perception.

The sonic turn opens the Pandora’s box of sense. This is developed most intensely in Nancy’s work Listening. There are several familiar accounts of modes of listening in the field. ^{Footnote 4} In Nancy, however, the attitude of listening goes well beyond the sonic – all the senses come into play, while touching and modulating each other. This is projected outward into the playground of the senses, in the heterogeneity of today’s art forms (especially in the digital realm), where the visual, sonic and conceptual collide more often than not. We might call this kind of listening a pan-sensual auscultation or, in Nancy’s formulation, an intelligible sense (Nancy Reference Nancy1996: 27). Aristotle called this ‘common sense’ and later attempts were made to organise this into ‘the source of all of the external senses, as a fountain gives rise to various streams’ (Heller-Roazen in Keeley Reference Keeley2012: 109). Between this ancient sense that we are sensing and the modern thought that we are thinking, is implied an ‘unstated verb’ (Heller-Roazen Reference Heller-Roazen2007: 298) as the experience of a higher resonant faculty. One could call this sentigence (sentience+intelligence).

In light of the previous, we must assume that the Pythagorean sects of the acousmatikoi and the mathematikoi refer not merely to circumstances of veiled presentations, but also to a much deeper approach to, difference between and synthesis of the two methods of gathering wisdom: sensing and thinking. At the moment and place of the generation of philosophy, the formation of the character of Sophos was transformed in its encounter with Logos – in both a psychological and a historical sense – but in a manner whereby vital sense (aesthanesthai) still contained thought (noein). This juxtaposition changes with and defines modernity. Yet, it seems that the field of electroacoustic music is alone in still holding so essential this ideal of the acousmatikoi – and should bear it forward.

6. Phonosophy

As resonant as the art of Russolian noise was in the twentieth century, we can later see how the clash and crossover that occurred as a result of the noise of art (Harvey Reference Harvey2013) was more broadly consequential. The methods and assumptions of the arts became wonderfully confused: textual approaches to art, visual approaches to sound, sonic approaches in philosophy. Deleuze and Guattari embraced this multiplicity and heterogeneity. Artistic production in the Deleuzian sense is framed in terms of presentation rather than representation: ‘The work of art is a being of sensation and nothing else: it exists in itself’ (Deleuze and Guattari Reference Deleuze and Guattari1994: 164).

Phonosophy does not presume to define a new area of thought, just a new way to turn the head (peripheral perception) in identifying this thread in previous and in future discourse/works. Jonathan Harvey points to the long line of ‘Pythagoras and his followers to Plato, Boethius, the Corpus Hermeticum, the Camerati, Vincenzo Galilei, Ficino, Fludd, Kircher, Kepler, Newton, and Freemasonry. The writings of Hindemith, Schoenberg, and Stockhausen are not far removed from it either’ (Harvey Reference Harvey1999: xiv). Harvey also extends his aspirations ‘to a future in which the deepest level of personality known to human beings, the radiant, still points beyond words, and is encouraged by music to become manifest’ (ibid.: xvi). And he also recognises that ‘the subtle dialectic of discourse and spirit, where one leads into and is unified with the other, is the gift of intelligent and sensitive listening’ (ibid.: 36). The phonosophic is not a severing with Pythagorean acoustics and mathematics. Material and entropic energy are not transcended in phono-sophy, but enhanced by a complementary speculation into negentropic duration and memory in following Bergson.

It is the purview of phonosophy then to investigate Bergsonian duration in a sonorous way, that does not depend on the language of Logos – but may resonate with it – as language can dampen the frequencies of observation in the sense to linguistic conversion. It will explore through the Nancian domain of meta-linguistic perception (listening) and Bergsonian sympathetic resonance (intuition). Sympathy implies entering into the interior of the thing/other, in our case, not stopping at the gate of the phenomenological object (sonore):

The experience of real duration and intuitive/sympathetic sense are the pillars of phonosophy.

Nancy’s Listening is addressed to all the senses and arts, but is particularly accessible in the realm of sound: ‘listening—the opening stretched towards the register of the sonorous, then to its musical amplification and composition—can and must appear to us not as a metaphor for access to self, but as the reality of this access’ (Nancy Reference Nancy2007: 12). It is the resonant self that, in a sense, we are listening for; an opening self. Opening to a Bergsonian time:

Sense is an intimation, a flash of intuition at the periphery of perception, like the blinking of a faint star that cannot be seen by staring (reduced listening). The exploration of sense is a possible agenda for electronic/technically saturated music, overcome with measurement, verification and utility, but with a tendency to both a honed sense and a vocabulary in the realm of resonance or as attuned to the phonoshere. The development of wisdom in phonos can only evolve within an intimate, circulating practice of listening and resounding. Phononomics/otonomics are operational activities, dedicated to the listening and voicing processes that work together in composition, in the sounding of sound, or making sonic documents in sessions that transform the psophic (unarticulate/noise) into the phonic (voiced). In phonosophy, we straddle material vibratory sound and temporal intuitive sense towards a deeper practice of knowing/sensing. The ecstatic is located at this very pivot of an oscillatory movement, the zero-point between the alternating nodes of sound and sentigence.

There may be, as Rahn affirms,

Phonosophy does not dissolve form/meaning all together, but can enlarge upon and provide amplitude, density and vibration. Phonosophy and articulative philosophy must remain necessary partners in this study.